Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arkansasbob
just a question: does anyone think it would be a violation of their rights for a school to paint a pentagon or islamic symbol on the field? (by this i mean anyone besides the people who are claiming their rights are being violated by a cross on a field)
I'd bet a dollar to a donut that whoever is upset about the cross, wouldn't say a word about any moooslim logo. Now, someone else might, but not those who complained about the cross.
Oh! I'd personally have no issue whatsoever with the Pentagon being painted on the field....I support our military! :D
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dawg80
I'd bet a dollar to a donut that whoever is upset about the cross, wouldn't say a word about any moooslim logo. Now, someone else might, but not those who complained about the cross.
Oh! I'd personally have no issue whatsoever with the Pentagon being painted on the field....I support our military! :D
pentagon/pentagram -- same difference...
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
techman05
Can you be more specific? Which right is violated?
obviously someone is claiming that their rights are being violated by the cross being painted on that football field. guisslapp implied that some people here would feel differently if it were a symbol of a different religion. while i think a lot of people would be upset by certain symbols, that's not the same as suing over the alleged violation of your right to religious liberty. i personally don't believe my religious liberty is violated by a sponsor's logo on state property, but i'm asking if there is anyone who does.
maybe a better question: if an islamic organization sponsored a high school football team and had their religious logo painted on the football field, would anyone claim that would be state endorsement of islam?
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arkansasbob
obviously someone is claiming that their rights are being violated by the cross being painted on that football field. guisslapp implied that some people here would feel differently if it were a symbol of a different religion. while i think a lot of people would be upset by certain symbols, that's not the same as suing over the alleged violation of your right to religious liberty. i personally don't believe my religious liberty is violated by a sponsor's logo on state property, but i'm asking if there is anyone who does.
maybe a better question: if an islamic organization sponsored a high school football team and had their religious logo painted on the football field, would anyone claim that would be state endorsement of islam?
First, you must find a high school willing to sell end zone to an islamic organization. Probably going to take you a while. Wouldn't even waste my time looking in Louisiana.
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bulldog Tom
First, you must find a high school willing to sell end zone to an islamic organization. Probably going to take you a while. Wouldn't even waste my time looking in Louisiana.
it's just a hypothetical. would you take it as state establishment of islam?
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bulldog Tom
First, you must find a high school willing to sell end zone to an islamic organization. Probably going to take you a while. Wouldn't even waste my time looking in Louisiana.
Exactly
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arkansasbob
obviously someone is claiming that their rights are being violated by the cross being painted on that football field. guisslapp implied that some people here would feel differently if it were a symbol of a different religion. while i think a lot of people would be upset by certain symbols, that's not the same as suing over the alleged violation of your right to religious liberty. i personally don't believe my religious liberty is violated by a sponsor's logo on state property, but i'm asking if there is anyone who does.
maybe a better question: if an islamic organization sponsored a high school football team and had their religious logo painted on the football field, would anyone claim that would be state endorsement of islam?
I feel similarly to you. I don’t drink and don’t see any reason someone could justify drinking. However, I haven’t called Tech to tell them that I am offended about Bud Light being the official beer of Tech athletics. I don’t have a right to keep anyone from doing something that offends me or I don’t agree with.
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
techman05
I feel similarly to you. I don’t drink and don’t see any reason someone could justify drinking. However, I haven’t called Tech to tell them that I am offended about Bud Light being the official beer of Tech athletics. I don’t have a right to keep anyone from doing something that offends me or I don’t agree with.
The First Amendment Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion. There is a line of Supreme Court cases saying as much.
Bud Light is not a religion.
Re: Happening in our back yard
I think we have moved past what the constitution or the courts have said about it. I took bob’s comment as though he was referring to whether each of us feels our individual rights or liberties are threatened or violated if another faith based system were allowed to advertise. I don’t think any advertising of any kind violates my personal liberty. Advertise wherever y’all u want and whatever you want.
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
techman05
I think we have moved past what the constitution or the courts have said about it. I took bob’s comment as though he was referring to whether each of us feels our individual rights or liberties are threatened or violated if another faith based system were allowed to advertise. I don’t think any advertising of any kind violates my personal liberty. Advertise wherever y’all u want and whatever you want.
You would be okay with your public high school posting a satanic symbol advertisement on the football field?
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
You would be okay with your public high school posting a satanic symbol advertisement on the football field?
I would not agree with it, but I don’t consider it my right to stop them. I do have a right to save up to send my kids to private school, which I do.
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
You would be okay with your public high school posting a satanic symbol advertisement on the football field?
this is the problem with your argument. it's not about people being okay with it. do you think anyone would take that as establishment of the satanic religion?
i may disagree with it, and i may even request that it be removed, but i wouldn't see it as a threat to religious freedom. no sane person would see that as a violation of the first amendment.
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arkansasbob
this is the problem with your argument. it's not about people being okay with it. do you think anyone would take that as establishment of the satanic religion?
i may disagree with it, and i may even request that it be removed, but i wouldn't see it as a threat to religious freedom. no sane person would see that as a violation of the first amendment.
Religious freedom is a different clause (free exercise clause) than the establishment clause.
The government can’t show a preference when it comes to religion. Just because you don’t “feel” that your right was violated doesn’t matter.
Btw, you can thank the Baptists for the establishment clause. They were mostly concerned about the government showing preference to Catholics - not satanists.
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Religious freedom is a different clause (free exercise clause) than the establishment clause.
The government can’t show a preference when it comes to religion. Just because you don’t “feel” that your right was violated doesn’t matter.
Btw, you can thank the Baptists for the establishment clause. They were mostly concerned about the government showing preference to Catholics - not satanists.
i'm quite happy with the establishment clause, as well as the free exercise clause.
so you think that people would complain that a satanic symbol on a football field would interfere with their right to freely exercise their religion?
Re: Happening in our back yard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arkansasbob
i'm quite happy with the establishment clause, as well as the free exercise clause.
so you think that people would complain that a satanic symbol on a football field would interfere with their right to freely exercise their religion?
I don’t think it implicates the free exercise clause, but I think that is what people mostly think of when they think of “religious freedom”. The “establishment clause” prevents the government from showing religious preference. It is more akin to discrimination.
So if Benton High put this ad on their field and then a satanist church offered the same money for ad space, what is the high school’s choice?